The Goat Thread: SBLII vs Eagles

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
IIRC Brady did a suboptimal job of opening up his body and giving Amendola a clean target, unlike the last time they ran the play.
Brady looked slow even by his standards.

Like he said, fortunately those measurable don’t have much to do with playing QB. But on that play, he became a receiver...

He might be ageless as a quarterback, but he’s definitely a 40 year old receiver.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
You can't blame the defense for being awful, because they've been mostly awful all year, and they're playing a team that just put up 30+ points on the #1 defense by wDVOA.
I don't understand this mentality. That wasn't the only game the Eagles played all year. The week before a lousy D held the Eagles to 15 points. Last night was a good offense playing great and a weak defense playing atrocious. They should absolutely be blamed. You should never give up 40 points, ever.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
I don't understand this mentality. That wasn't the only game the Eagles played all year. The week before a lousy D held the Eagles to 15 points. Last night was a good offense playing great and a weak defense playing atrocious. They should absolutely be blamed. You should never give up 40 points, ever.
Seriously. The Patriots had 2 full weeks to prepare and they knew exactly what was coming. They just, for whatever reason, couldn’t figure out how to stop it, which was probably a personnel/coaching issue.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
could the offense have scored 45-50 last night? if McDaniels wakes up a bit sooner and Cooks isn't dumb? well, yes, they were that good for large stretches of the game that

when the offense doesn't score 45 when we need 45, it's their fault for losing the game? never

the offense had like a B+/A- night. adjusted for PHI's defense, that is championship caliber. a complete football team should not have to play perfect on one side of the ball as the only avenue to victory
 

Hoodie Sleeves

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 24, 2015
1,204
could the offense have scored 45-50 last night? if McDaniels wakes up a bit sooner and Cooks isn't dumb? well, yes, they were that good for large stretches of the game that
What I'd really like to know is why the Patriots have looked completely dysfunctional in the first half since week 14. Even against the Titans they looked terrible in the first quarter. And conversely, why they seem to be able to manhandle teams in the 2nd half.

Maybe they're just better conditioned than everyone else - but it sure feels like their pre-game scouting/gameplanning isn't working.
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,749
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
What I'd really like to know is why the Patriots have looked completely dysfunctional in the first half since week 14. Even against the Titans they looked terrible in the first quarter. And conversely, why they seem to be able to manhandle teams in the 2nd half.

Maybe they're just better conditioned than everyone else - but it sure feels like their pre-game scouting/gameplanning isn't working.
Offense seemed to be a lot better in "fuck it, Tom, you figure this one out" mode this season.
 
I don't understand this mentality. That wasn't the only game the Eagles played all year. The week before a lousy D held the Eagles to 15 points. Last night was a good offense playing great and a weak defense playing atrocious. They should absolutely be blamed. You should never give up 40 points, ever.
FWIW, the Falcons defense had become quite decent by the end of their season. And also, that game was outdoors; yesterday's was not. The Vikings game was outdoors as well, of course, but I've come to the conclusion that the Eagles offense may have been pretty damn good...and maybe, just maybe, their system helped make both Foles and Wentz look better than they are in a vacuum. (Just as Year 2 of Shanahan's system in Atlanta made Ryan look outstanding last year, and many other OCs have done for their QBs down the years.)
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
Excluding the meaningless Nate Sudfeld game, the Eagles scored more points per game this season than the Patriots.
Most of that was with Wentz, and they didn't average 40 points a game either. By expected points, their final two games of the season were their best performances of the year by a mile - +29.59 last night (which was, as far as I can tell, the second-best offensive performance by any team in any game all season) and +25.85 against the Vikings; they never even broke 20 otherwise. They hadn't even reached +12 with Foles prior to the Vikings game.

And my point was in response to we should have expected a defensive performance like yesterday. There were only 25 regular season games this year where a team allowed 40 points, and they lost all 25 (the Jags did beat the Steelers in the divisional round allowing 42). Go back five years, teams allowing 40 are 6-146. If you expect the D to allow 40 points, there's no point in even watching the game. Christ, the 0-16 Browns made it the whole year without allowing 40 points in a game. It was an abomination.
 

Ale Xander

Hamilton
SoSH Member
Oct 31, 2013
72,428
Anyone have the stat for yards per possession for yesterday and compared to the regular season?
 

Bellhorn

Lumiere
SoSH Member
Aug 22, 2006
2,328
Brighton, MA
While the stats favor going for it, what the stats cannot tell you is the situational impact of getting 3 points versus being stopped on 4th down. It was early, and predicting the final score at that time was impossible. Sometimes the sure 3 is all you need to win the game, and perhaps BB had a bit more confidence in the defense than deserved.

The outcome made it appear to be a bad call, but I'm not sure it's quite the slam dunk bad call the numbers above indicate.
The bolded sentence (which is correct) contradicts your first sentence (which is not). It is precisely because it was still early in the game that expected points are the only relevant criterion. williams_0482 has it exactly right. It was an objectively poor decision.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,369
Max Kellerman - no I won't link to it because ESPN - with another ridiculous hot take that Belichick has seen Brady slide, and that he (Kellerman) saw warning signs of Brady and the cliff in the Super Bowl.

The same Tom Brady who threw for 505 yards, 3 td, and 0 int against a great defense in one of the all-time greatest performances by a quarterback in league history? That guy showed signs of falling off a cliff?
 

Soxy

Member
SoSH Member
Dec 1, 2008
6,095
FWIW, the Falcons defense had become quite decent by the end of their season. And also, that game was outdoors; yesterday's was not. The Vikings game was outdoors as well, of course, but I've come to the conclusion that the Eagles offense may have been pretty damn good...and maybe, just maybe, their system helped make both Foles and Wentz look better than they are in a vacuum. (Just as Year 2 of Shanahan's system in Atlanta made Ryan look outstanding last year, and many other OCs have done for their QBs down the years.)
Not sure if you follow Cian Fahey on twitter but he was beating this drum long before Wentz got hurt. He watches a lot of film and writes an annual publication on QBs. Pretty much all season he argued that Wentz is the same guy he was last season but that his supporting cast was much, much better this season and that was really the difference in his play.

Foles made some great throws yesterday but most of his success was due to a great scheme creating wide open receivers and an offensive line that gave him all the time in the world (Pats weak pass rush didn't hurt his cause either).

Anyways, the goat has to be Matt Patricia. Defense had no answers all night long.

Their calling card throughout the season, and really throughout Patricia's tenure as DC, was that they may give up yards but they'll get the stops and make the plays when they need to. Third down, red zone, fourth down.... they were awful in these situations all night long.

No sacks and a non-existent pass rush. (Where was Wise? Adam Butler?)

The one turnover was more of a fluky tipped ball than something they caused.

Didn't seem to make any notable adjustments besides switching Gilmore onto Jefferey. Which is hard to give them too much credit for considering just about everyone expected them to match-up Gilmore with Jefferey from the start, since that seemed to obviously be the best use of Gilmore's talents.

And even after all of that, the biggest let down for me was that the defense just could not play any complimentary football to help out the offense. Actually, I take that back. They did twice: after the botched field goal, they forced a 3-and-out and an Eagles punt (the only punt of the game). And after the strip sack on Brady, they forced another 3-and-out and a FG to keep it a game. That's it. (And those were the only times either offense went 3-and-out.)

Pats kick a FG to tie it at 3-3? Defense promptly gives up 77 yards on 3 plays for a TD.

Pats turn it over on downs? Defense then gives up a 6 play, 65 yard TD drive, including a big 3rd-and-7 conversion.

Pats score before the 2 minute warning to make a it 15-12 game and what does the defense do? Give up a 55 yard pass on a 3rd down wheel route, then a 4th down trick play TD pass to the QB. 70 yards in a minute and half and now it's back to a 10 point halftime lead.

Pats get a much needed TD drive right after halftime and how does the defense respond? By giving up an 11 play, 85 yard TD drive that included three 3rd down conversions.

Pats finally take the lead in the 4th quarter and the defense proceeds to let the Eagles chew up 7 minutes on a mammoth 75 yard drive that included a 4th down conversion and another 3rd down TD (the Eagles' last three touchdowns were all either on 3rd down or 4th down).

Time and time again, Brady and the offense kept this team afloat and valiantly tried to carry them to the finish line. Time and time again, the defense simply could not hold up their end of the bargain. I don't think you can point the finger at one player on defense, or even one specific unit on defense. You have to start with the coaching.

I really hate to say this but Matty P leaving for Detroit is probably a good thing for the Patriots. Yeah, the talent hasn't really been there and they've been hit with a lot of injuries. But it's hard to look at the way this defense has played under Patricia and say that he's been overly successful.

Not that DVOA is the be all, end all, but here is where the Pats' defense has ranked since 2010, when Patricia basically became the de facto DC (officially it wasn't until 2012):

2010 - 21st
2011 - 30th
2012 - 15th
2013 - 20th
2014 - 12th
2015 - 12th
2016 - 16th
2017 - 31st

Mediocre, at best.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
McDaniels gets a ton of shit on this board, yet, his offense put up 28 on the Legion of Boom, 34 against a fast Atlanta defense, and 33 against a really good Philly defense. That’s almost 32ppg in his last 3 SB games.

Meanwhile, Patricia’s defense gave up 24, 28, and 41 or 31ppg. Just putrid.
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
McDaniels has the GOAT, Gronk, playoff White and Dola, etc.

Patricia has....?

Not defending him, but it’s not a fair comparison.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
McDaniels has the GOAT, Gronk, playoff White and Dola, etc.

Patricia has....?

Not defending him, but it’s not a fair comparison.
Sure, it is. For starters, let me know which number Gronk was wearing last year against Atlanta. Secondly, he lost Gronk against Jags, Cooks in SB, and still didn’t lose a beat. Patricia couldn’t stop Nick Foles from tearing him apart even with 2 weeks to prepare.

I get the disparity of personnel but Brady will always swing that debate. But the defense wasn’t having issues the last 10 weeks so what changed?
 

Marciano490

Urological Expert
SoSH Member
Nov 4, 2007
62,312
Sure, it is. For starters, let me know which number Gronk was wearing last year against Atlanta. Secondly, he lost Gronk against Jags, Cooks in SB, and still didn’t lose a beat. Patricia couldn’t stop Nick Foles from tearing him apart even with 2 weeks to prepare.

I get the disparity of personnel but Brady will always swing that debate. But the defense wasn’t having issues the last 10 weeks so what changed?
RPOs man, RPOs.
 

Super Nomario

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 5, 2000
14,012
Mansfield MA
McDaniels gets a ton of shit on this board, yet, his offense put up 28 on the Legion of Boom, 34 against a fast Atlanta defense, and 33 against a really good Philly defense. That’s almost 32ppg in his last 3 SB games.
The McDaniels criticisms basically amount to either a) not every playcall works! or b) why aren't we running more (usually when we're averaging 7+ yards per pass and < 3 yards per run)?

Meanwhile, Patricia’s defense gave up 24, 28, and 41 or 31ppg. Just putrid.
To be fair, that Atlanta team had a really good O and 7 of those points were on Brady. I think Patricia has mostly been pretty good when he's had the horses.
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
McDaniels gets a ton of shit on this board, yet, his offense put up 28 on the Legion of Boom, 34 against a fast Atlanta defense, and 33 against a really good Philly defense. That’s almost 32ppg in his last 3 SB games.

Meanwhile, Patricia’s defense gave up 24, 28 21, and 41 or 31ppg. Just putrid.
Fixed it for you; 7 of the points in SB51 were due to an interception return for a TD; can't blame Patricia for that one.
 

BigSoxFan

Member
SoSH Member
May 31, 2007
47,083
The McDaniels criticisms basically amount to either a) not every playcall works! or b) why aren't we running more (usually when we're averaging 7+ yards per pass and < 3 yards per run)?


To be fair, that Atlanta team had a really good O and 7 of those points were on Brady. I think Patricia has mostly been pretty good when he's had the horses.
That is true. Forgot about the Pick 6. My angst is mostly just this game, really. 41 fucking points is a video game score. And it was compounded by the fact that Brady was just insane and now it’ll just be a footnote.
 

DeadlySplitter

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 20, 2015
33,247
I think it will be more than a footnote as it set several records. someone says Brady's "only" 5-3 in the SB, you can point to this right away why that's a shit stat.

that the Eagles and fans were likely frightened they would still lose the game with 2:21 left, is all the credit you need
 

mulluysavage

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 19, 2005
714
Reads threads backwards
I thought the play of the game was Eagles go for it on 4th and 1 from their own 44, 5:40 left. Looks like a for-sure pick play to me - McCourty run into by a receiver deliberately, freeing up Ertz. Flowers and Van Noy I think were closing in on Foles.

I'm not up on where the league is at with pick plays, I know they are tough to call - Is this particular non-call consistent with how they've been officiating that this season?
 

lexrageorge

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 31, 2007
18,095
I thought the play of the game was Eagles go for it on 4th and 1 from their own 44, 5:40 left. Looks like a for-sure pick play to me - McCourty run into by a receiver deliberately, freeing up Ertz. Flowers and Van Noy I think were closing in on Foles.

I'm not up on where the league is at with pick plays, I know they are tough to call - Is this particular non-call consistent with how they've been officiating that this season?
Pick plays are allowed within one yard of the LOS. McCourty's left foot (the one closest to the QB) was maybe 1.25 yards from the LOS. Based on that, I can see why the refs may have missed it. Or, if they saw it, they decided to let it go, figuring ticky-tack OPI/DPI/holding penalties are not the best way to officiate a hard-fought Super Bowl contest between the league's best 2 teams.
 

54thMA

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 15, 2012
10,154
Westwood MA
I thought the play of the game was Eagles go for it on 4th and 1 from their own 44, 5:40 left. Looks like a for-sure pick play to me - McCourty run into by a receiver deliberately, freeing up Ertz. Flowers and Van Noy I think were closing in on Foles.

I'm not up on where the league is at with pick plays, I know they are tough to call - Is this particular non-call consistent with how they've been officiating that this season?
As has been mentioned here in another thread, you can run a pick play within one yard from the LOS, that one occurred about a yard and half from the LOS.

They weren't calling that, it would be the true definition of a ticky tack call and considering all the holding they allowed by both offensive lines, they certainly weren't throwing a flag on that.

OR, what lexrageorge just said....
 

crystalline

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 12, 2009
5,771
JP
Brady looked slow even by his standards.

Like he said, fortunately those measurable don’t have much to do with playing QB. But on that play, he became a receiver...

He might be ageless as a quarterback, but he’s definitely a 40 year old receiver.
I blame Amendola. Brady was WIDE OPEN. Don't lead him so much. AARGH.




Basically this game turned on their receiver being more accurate than our receiver. Dang. Danny Amendola, you KNOW not to jump when you throw. Set your dang feet.
 

heavyde050

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 17, 2006
11,257
San Francisco
The Foles TD catch was also much easier than the one Brady dropped.
He was all alone in the end zone and pretty much facing the guy throwing it.
 

SemperFidelisSox

Member
SoSH Member
May 25, 2008
31,083
Boston, MA
DVOA under Pees and Mangini.

2009: 14th
2008: 17th
2007: 11th
2006: 7th
2005: 27th

This had been a mediocre unit long before Patricia, with one outlier. They haven’t had a Top 5 defense since ‘03.
 

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,026
I blame Amendola. Brady was WIDE OPEN. Don't lead him so much. AARGH.




Basically this game turned on their receiver being more accurate than our receiver. Dang. Danny Amendola, you KNOW not to jump when you throw. Set your dang feet.
Was supposed to be Edelman...
 

JimD

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 29, 2001
8,681
All I know is we fucking gave up 41 fucking points to Nick fucking Foles which is in-fucking-credible & In-fucking-excusable.
They gave up 42 to Alex Smith in week 1. Does it make you feel any better because Smith was his team's week 1 starter and Foles wasn't?

Not all backups are created equal. Foles could have started for more than a few teams this season.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
Yes. Alex Smith has been shown to be an adequate starter in the NFL, probably somewhere in the top half of starting QBs in the league. Nick Foles has literally had one good year and a bunch ranging from mediocre to suck to "oh he's still in the league?".

And, sure in hindsight he could have started for a few teams but if you went into your season with him as your starting QB, you would likely assume you'd be closer to the Browns in the standings than the Pats or Eagles. Nothing in recent history suggested he was even replacement-level.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,719
Deep inside Muppet Labs
You mean the guy who started off his career with a 27:2 TD:INT ratio before getting hurt and getting traded to the shitheap that was Jeff Fischer is suddenly a worthless player? Come on now.

Had it had been Sudfeld who came in and lit up the Pats I could see "LOL they lost to a backup QB!" narrative. Foles, no.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
You mean the guy who started off his career with a 27:2 TD:INT ratio before getting hurt and getting traded to the shitheap that was Jeff Fischer is suddenly a worthless player? Come on now.

Had it had been Sudfeld who came in and lit up the Pats I could see "LOL they lost to a backup QB!" narrative. Foles, no.
Yeah I don't particularly consider 5 years ago recent history, so yes I still considered him a worthless player.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,824
Needham, MA
There was enough data to show that Foles was capable of playing at a high level, and in fact he was playing at a high level in both playoff games this year. Plus the Pats were an untimely delay of game penalty away from possibly being knocked out of the playoffs by Blake Bortles, and had made plenty of other mediocre QBs look good this year.

I never expected them to be as bad as they were, but it wasn’t surprising to me that the defense struggled and Foles was able to make some plays.
 

Bowhemian

Member
SoSH Member
Nov 10, 2015
5,694
Bow, NH
Foles didn't just make plays against the Pats, he looked pretty damn good. Gotta give him some credit. Of course, the suck-ass defense helped, but his level of play was the biggest factor in his success.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
Well congrats, you were wrong then. Very very wrong. The Vikings could have attested to that as well.
Thanks for pointing that out and I am aware. You're also clearly forgetting the context in which I was responding, which was whether I would feel better about Alex Smith putting up 40 than I would Nick Foles. Any world in which you say no means you're either being delusional or suffering from a great deal of hindsight bias. Nick Foles was literally nothing this year until the Vikings game. He had two good games and now he is a top tier QB. Get out of here with that shit.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,719
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Thanks for pointing that out and I am aware. You're also clearly forgetting the context in which I was responding, which was whether I would feel better about Alex Smith putting up 40 than I would Nick Foles. Any world in which you say no means you're either being delusional or suffering from a great deal of hindsight bias. Nick Foles was literally nothing this year until the Vikings game. He had two good games and now he is a top tier QB. Get out of here with that shit.
He was most definitely not "literally nothing" and the most cursory of looks at his gamelogs would tell you that. Hell, the Pats held him to the lowest completion percentage in the postseason, which should tell you something about his play.

Jeff Fischer could fuck up a two car parade. 3 of his former QBs were in the postseason this year, all of whom played significantly better without him than with. Nick Foles is a quality QB and after that Minnesota game I'm hardly shocked he played well against us too.
 

kenneycb

Hates Goose Island Beer; Loves Backdoor Play
SoSH Member
Dec 2, 2006
16,089
Tuukka's refugee camp
He was most definitely not "literally nothing" and the most cursory of looks at his gamelogs would tell you that. Hell, the Pats held him to the lowest completion percentage in the postseason, which should tell you something about his play.

Jeff Fischer could fuck up a two car parade. 3 of his former QBs were in the postseason this year, all of whom played significantly better without him than with. Nick Foles is a quality QB and after that Minnesota game I'm hardly shocked he played well against us too.
Hooray he had a good game against the Giants and had a good year in Chip Kelly's first year running a novel offense that wasn't sustainable before going on a mediocre run in the NFL and putting on a Joe Flacco-like run in the playoffs. Color me a little skeptical moving forward.

I also forgot his great game against the 8-8 Indianapolis Colts and rousing 19-14 win over the Jags in 2016.
 

Hoya81

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 3, 2010
8,457
Foles didn't just make plays against the Pats, he looked pretty damn good. Gotta give him some credit. Of course, the suck-ass defense helped, but his level of play was the biggest factor in his success.
The Jeffrey and Clement TD catches were excellent throws. The Ertz TD wasn’t anything fancy, Ertz just made a great move.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
You mean the guy who started off his career with a 27:2 TD:INT ratio before getting hurt and getting traded to the shitheap that was Jeff Fischer is suddenly a worthless player? Come on now.

Had it had been Sudfeld who came in and lit up the Pats I could see "LOL they lost to a backup QB!" narrative. Foles, no.
It will be interesting what Foles might fetch in a trade, assuming the Eagles are confident enough in Wentz’s knee to make him available. But anyone making the Foles argument here last week would have been ducking. People begged for Philadelphia.

I always though 5-2 in Super Bowls under this regime was about right. The improbability of the two Giants losses in my mind was balanced by the Seattle save and Atlanta comeback.

Now I feel we are owed one. If they came to Sunday’s game with anything better than a Big 12 defense, the Pats win and maybe win comfortably. It is a goddamn shame.

So much for, “give B.B. two weeks to game plan, and ...”. They never figured this shit out and/or never had the personnel to get it done. All the improvement after week 4 was fucking illusory against any QB with mobility, good skill players and a cool head. Yes, the Pats set the edge better and controlled the TE’s better than in the KC opener. They also got gashed up the middle, and abused in every other way.

I am not buying the injury excuse. Hightower is injury prone, and other teams had big defensive guys go down. Philly lost their QB on defense. And yes Philly got abused Sunday’s night too — but they won the game and at least their abuse came at the hands of the GOAT.
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,719
Deep inside Muppet Labs
Philly ran the same RPOs that Jacksonville did, and the Pats got toasted by both.

Can't agree we're owed anything. Pats went toe to toe offensively with Philly and came up one drive short. Both defenses stunk. Brady had the ball in his hands with 2 mins left, needing a TD for the win. I felt pretty good about that.
 

BaseballJones

ivanvamp
SoSH Member
Oct 1, 2015
24,369
He was most definitely not "literally nothing" and the most cursory of looks at his gamelogs would tell you that. Hell, the Pats held him to the lowest completion percentage in the postseason, which should tell you something about his play.

Jeff Fischer could fuck up a two car parade. 3 of his former QBs were in the postseason this year, all of whom played significantly better without him than with. Nick Foles is a quality QB and after that Minnesota game I'm hardly shocked he played well against us too.
Let's just remember this game next year when the Pats are facing a mediocre QB and people in here are saying how we shouldn't be afraid of this QB blah blah blah. The TB/BB Pats have now lost in the playoffs to:

Jake Plummer
Peyton Manning in his prime (twice)
Peyton Manning when he was the worst QB in the league
Joe Flacco (twice)
Mark Sanchez
Eli Manning (twice)
Nick Foles
 

Smiling Joe Hesketh

Throw Momma From the Train
Moderator
SoSH Member
May 20, 2003
35,719
Deep inside Muppet Labs
It's almost like crazy shit happens in the playoffs all the time! Blake Bortles is 2-1 in the postseason!

I seem to remember most of the country shocked that the Greatest Show on Turf lost to a backup QB a while ago. What was his name?